Arxiv:1709.04428V1 [Math.NT]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
WARING’S PROBLEM IN FINITE RINGS YE¸SIM˙ DEMIRO˙ GLU˘ KARABULUT ABSTRACT. In this paper we obtain sharp results for Waring’s problem over general finite rings, by using a combination of Artin-Wedderburn theory and Hensel’s lemma and building on new proofs of analogous results over finite fields that are achieved using spectral graph theory. We also prove an analogue of Sárközy’s theorem for finite fields. Keywords: Waring’s Problem, Spectral Graph Theory, Artin-Wedderburn Theory, Finite Rings. AMS 2010 Subject Classification: Primary: 11P05; Secondary: 05C25, 16K99. 1. INTRODUCTION Waring’s problem has a very long history with an extensive literature spanning many different areas of mathematics. It seems likely to continue to be a central problem in mathematical research for some time to come. The original version of the problem was due to Edward Waring, and first appeared in Meditationes Algebraicae, published in 1770, where he states "Every number is the sum of 4 squares; every number is the sum of 9 cubes; every number is the sum of 19 biquadrates [4th powers]; and so on.". Although we can not be sure exactly what Waring had in mind, we assume that he meant that for every k > 2, there exists a smallest positive integer g(k), with the property that every x N can be written as a sum of at most g(k) ∈ many kth powers of natural numbers, satisfying g(2) = 4, g(3) = 9, g(4) = 19, etc. The fact that g(2) = 4 is equivalent to the four-squares theorem that was proven by Lagrange the same year Waring published his general conjecture, but was apparently already known to Diophantus who alluded to it nearly fifteen hundred years earlier in examples apppearing in his treatise Arithmetica (see [15]). arXiv:1709.04428v1 [math.NT] 13 Sep 2017 Hilbert proved the existence of g(k) for arbitrary k by evaluating a 25-fold integral in 1909, and as a result of the efforts of many mathematicians over a period of many years, explicit formulas for g(k) have now been found for all but finitely many values of k (see [18]), with multiple areas of mathematics such as the Gaussian integers and additive number theory developed in the process of obtaining these results. It then became natural to ask whether the bound g(k) could be improved if instead of considering all x N, one ∈ limited oneself to considering only those x that are sufficiently large. We let G(k) denote the smallest such improved bound, and the question of finding explicit values of G(k) for arbitrary k is still wide open, with the problem having been solved only for k = 2 and k = 4. One of the approaches for attacking this question involves finding upper bounds for G(k) using variants of the Hardy-Littlewood circle method, which is a This work was partially supported by NSA grant H98230-15-1-0319. 1 2 YE¸SIM˙ DEMIRO˙ GLU˘ KARABULUT powerful analytic tool also motivated by Waring’s problem (for an overview of the complete history of the problem, see [18]). After considering this question in the context of N, it seems natural to generalize it to working over Zn, traditionally referred to as Waring’s problem mod n. One can fix a k and look for a result which gives the th smallest m = g(k,n) such that every number in Zn can be written as a sum of at most m many k powers. This problem was first completely solved for k = 2, 3 by Small in [16], after which he observed that the same techniques yield a solution for all k, [13]. 1 The main contribution of the current paper is to extend results for Waring’s problem to the context of general finite rings. As far as we are aware, there do not exist other such results in the literature, so that our results appear to be the first known ones of this type. We get these generalizations by appealing to Artin-Wedderburn theory and Hensel’s lemma, allowing us to build on results over finite fields obtained at an earlier point (see Section 3) in our paper. In particular, the following represents a sampling of the type of results found in Section 5, (see Theorem 5.2 for a more complete statement). Let R be a (not necessarily commutative) finite ring. Then any element of R can be written as a sum of n many kth powers in R where n = 2, if k = 3 as long as 3, 4, 7 ∤ R • | | where n = 5, if k = 4 as long as 2, 9 ∤ R • | | where n = 3, if k = 5 as long as 5, 11, 16 ∤ R • | | where n = 7, if k = 6 as long as 2, 3, 25 ∤ R • | | where n = 4, if k = 7 as long as 7, 8 ∤ R • | | where one can lower the values of n for any given k as long as one is willing to exclude a few more numbers from dividing R . | | In order to save space, we limit our explicit statements in Theorem 5.2 to 3 6 k 6 11, but similar results could easily be obtained for any value of k for which one has results over finite fields. This reduces the question of Waring’s problem over general finite rings to the analogous questions over finite fields. Note that Small’s solution to Waring’s problem mod n when n is a prime answers Waring’s problem for a special class of finite fields. In addition, Small obtains a result for more general finite fields by applying an inequality from the theory of diagonal equations over such fields to prove that if q > (k 1)4, then − 1There are a few minor errors in the stated values of g(k, n) that appear in [13], [14], [16]. The correct values should be g(4, 41) = 2, g(5, 71) = 2 and g(5, 101) = 2. WARING’S PROBLEM IN FINITE RINGS 3 th every element of Fq can be written as a sum of two k powers in [14] (which when translated into the language of this paper says γ(k,q) 6 2 whenever q > (k 1)4). In Section 3, we deduce an asymptotically − equivalent result to his and to results of [19], [21] by applying graph theoretic methods yielding self contained elementary proofs that when q > k4, every element of the field can be written as a sum of two kth powers, and when q > k3, as three kth powers, etc. We also enlist the help of a supercomputer to calculate the values for γ(k,q) for all q too small to be covered by the above mentioned results when k 6 37. On top of this, in the process of proving our finite field Waring’s problem results (similar to results that were already known), we also obtain the following new result providing an analogue of Sárközy’s theorem in the finite field setting. qk Theorem. Let k be a positive integer. If E is a subset of F with size E > then it contains at least q | | √q 1 th − two distinct elements whose difference is a k power. Thus, in particular if k is fixed and E = Ω √q as | | q , then E contains at least two distinct elements whose difference is a kth power. →∞ Our main tool in the proofs of our finite field and Sárközy’s results is a spectral gap theorem for Cayley digraphs for which we provide a self-contained proof in Section 2.1. By building on these finite field results, we also obtain in Section 4 upper bounds for Waring numbers for matrix rings over finite fields (hence over general semisimple finite rings) that are stronger than our aforementioned results obtained in the case of more general finite rings. Results relating to matrix rings exist in the literature (see the history section and references in [10] for a summary), but they often focus on existence results, showing that a given matrix over a commutative ring can be written as a sum of some number of kth powers, rather than determining how many kth powers need to be used. As was the case for our more general results mentioned above, our results over matrix and semisimple finite rings also rely on an efficient use of Hensel’s Lemma, (see Theorem 4.2 for more details). 2. PRELIMINARIES 2.1. Spectral Graph Theory. The material presented here prior to Cayley digraphs is pretty standard and can be found in any introductory graph theory book, e.g. [7], [20]. A graph G consists of a vertex set V (G), an edge set E(G), and a relation that associates with each edge two vertices called its endpoints. A directed graph or digraph is a graph in which the endpoints of each edge is an ordered pair of vertices. If (u, v) also denoted by u v is such an ordered pair of vertices, that means → there exists an edge in the digraph with tail u and head v. When we draw a digraph, we represent the vertices with some dots and the directed edges between the vertices with some curves on the plane, and we give each edge a direction from its tail to its head. We define the out-degree of a vertex u, denoted by d+(u), as the number of edges with tail u and the in-degree, d−(u), as the number of edges with head u. Each loop (i.e. 4 YE¸SIM˙ DEMIRO˙ GLU˘ KARABULUT an edge have the same endpoints) contributes +1 to both in- and out-degree.